Have some residents of the threatened West Kensington and Gibbs Green estates in the Conservative-run borough of Hammersmith and Fulham been given the impression that they will receive preferential treatment in the allocation of the planned first replacement homes in nearby Seagrave Road as part of the controversial Earls Court redevelopment project? On Monday and Tuesday I published the accounts of two who say emphatically that they have.

One said that earlier this year a man who presented himself as representing the council in some way and was seeking support for the re-election of Boris Johnson as London mayor told him that if he provided a an early, positive response to the council's public consultation on its plans to see the estates demolished he would be picked first to move to Seagrave Road.

The other said that about two years ago a council officer promised her at a public meeting that if the two-bedroom flat she currently shares with her adult son was demolished they would both be re-housed in one-bedroom flats in the Seagrave Road development.

The council denies that any "early movers list" or "VIP list" of residents who will receive priority in the allocation of Seagrave Road homes exists. However, in correspondence with opposition Labour group leader Stephen Cowan the council's chief executive has described himself as "satisfied" that people who believe they would benefit from the "regeneration" of the estates have gathered a "set of names" of residents they consider supportive of the idea – as distinct from being marked out for priority treatment – but that council officers were not involved.

Cowan continues to demand a full and independent inquiry into allegations that a "VIP list" does, in fact, exist. The chief executive has so far refused this. Meanwhile, I understand that Scotland Yard detectives have been assessing a document containing what it claims is evidence supporting allegations that council officers have illegally offered some residents priority treatment in the allocation of the – as yet unbuilt – Seagrave Road homes in return for their backing the demolition of the estates.

I can now bring you the story of two more West Kensington estate residents, Colin and Judith – who preferred not to have their surnames published – who say that they have been given the impression that a move to Seagrave Road would be, at the least, a strong possibility in the event of their flat in Desborough House, a medium-rise block on the West Kensington estate where their 15 year-old daughter also lives, being knocked down.

Colin recalls being visited at home by a canvasser for the Conservative Party during the 2010 general election and borough election campaigns: "I'd say he was in his mid to late thirties. He was whistled up, so he a suit on." Colin also said that the man was wearing a blue rosette. "He did give me a bit of spiel at the door, which I believed, like an idiot."

Colin continued:

He actually stated Seagrave Road. Because I asked him, because I had health problems at the time, would I get a flat with a garden? And he said, "We could put your name on the list." And that was one of the reasons that swayed me.

He said there was a list for Seagrave Road and he was saying they would only be four storeys high, or something.

Colin said that the man "didn't say I would definitely get a place," but was very clear that he was told his name would go on a list of people keen to go to Seagrave Road. But was he quite certain that the man was assuring them they'd be considered for a priority move specifically to Seagrave Road or, by important contrast, reassuring them, in line with the council's consistent public promise, that they would be rehoused within the much larger, separate Earls Court project area, where most of the promised replacement homes for the 761 of West Kensington and Gibbs Green would eventually be built if the full scheme goes ahead?

Colin's account suggests that at some points in the conversation the distinction between the Seagrave Road homes, for which detailed planning permission has been granted, and the Earls Court scheme as a whole which has yet to complete the planning application process, might have been lost. Yet at other points, Colin recalls, the assurance seemed to be that he and Judith would be going to Seagrave Road as opposed to any other part of the development area.

Then there is the question of a list. Colin said:

I said, "Well I've got bad health, is it possible to get me moved to a ground floor flat or a ground floor with a garden." I don't know what this so called list was. He said, "I will put it on the list." He said, "I will put your name on the list." I mean, it was just promises to get the vote, and, I mean, I voted them in, so it's just as much my fault as it is anybody else's.

I asked Colin what else, if anything, he knew about the list his visitor mentioned.

No, I mean he was writing bits and pieces down on a clipboard that he had. You don't know what he was writing down, he could have been writing, he could have just been scribbling, I don't know. But he had it up and he was making out that he was taking notes.

Colin says that he broke the habit of a lifetime by voting Conservative in 2010 on the strength of what the canvasser told them, and persuaded Judith to vote Conservative too. He regrets this now:

If somebody promises you something and you think that you're going to gain out of something, you're going to go with it. I mean, if I could go back two years he would have never have got my vote.

What can we conclude? Colin doesn't claim that he was promised a ground floor home in a new Seagrave Road development in return for supporting the demolition of the estates, or even promised one at all. He does, however, say very firmly that he was told his name would be put on a list, one that seemed to be of names of residents eager to be allocated a home there.

This would be consistent with what Hammersmith and Fulham's chief executive wrote to Stephen Cowan. But Cowan remains unimpressed by the chief executive's refusal to investigate the matter in the manner he requires.

He is not satisfied that the inquiries made so far have established that the list was not a "VIP list" or "early movers list" of residents to be given priority, or rule out all possibility that council officers were involved in compiling it. The council says that all new homes will be allocated in accordance with its local lettings plan. More on all this to come.

Comments are not open on this article but readers wishing to respond to it can email me at dave.hill@guardian.co.uk